From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Sep 13 22:35:44 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EF6716A4CE
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:35:44 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from eagle.aitken.com (eagle.aitken.com [198.137.194.213])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA06443D1D
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:35:43 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from jaitken@aitken.com)
Received: by eagle.aitken.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 22901B2464; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 18:35:43 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 18:35:43 -0400
From: Jeff Aitken <jaitken@aitken.com>
To: Daniel Rudy <dr2867@pacbell.net>
Message-ID: <20040913223543.GA28187@eagle.aitken.com>
References: <41461A28.1060308@pacbell.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <41461A28.1060308@pacbell.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i
cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Kerberos 5 Security Alert?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting]
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>,
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>,
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:35:44 -0000

On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 03:07:36PM -0700, Daniel Rudy wrote:
> Does FreeBSD use the MIT implementation?  

No, the system-supplied krb5 bits are from the Heimdal distribution.
The MIT distribution is available as a port, but is not part of the
base system.


> Why wasn't there a FreeBSD security alert for Kerberos 5?  

I may be wrong, but I think that security alerts are issued only
for the base system (i.e., things that are part of FreeBSD proper).
Vulnerabilities that affect ports are documented here:

    http://www.vuxml.org/freebsd/

I'm sure someone will correct me if this is wrong.


--Jeff